Don't worry Ruthie........I intend to come back and read my post like a mantra every morning....just to remind myself!

perhaps you should print it out and paste it to the top of your pc/tv (whatever you'll be watching on Caz).like ww I tell myself that it really should be easier now as we don't have that awful question looming: will he finally win a slam? But even though he was won two and I'll be proud of him whatever happens now, of course I'm greedy and I now want more and I don't want anyone saying he has peaked or is on a downward slope, should he not win.

To be honest, and I'm never one to hold back with leaping to Andy's defence, I don't really see what Pam Shriver has said that is apparently so awful.

Andy will probably never be a Djokovic in that messing about sort of way, but really, would we want him to be? Personally, every time Djokovic does a ridiculous dancy thing, or puts on a daft mask, costume or whatever, I think he makes a right pillock of himself and I want to punch him. I'm all for a laugh, don't get me wrong, but personally I don't see what is so endearing about it. Personally I think it's pathetic and a wee bit desperate, a bit like he's juming up and down with his hands in the air, begging the crowds to like him.

The thing with what Shriver said is that she used the word personality. Some will leap on that assume she's suggesting Andy doesn't have one, but that isn't what she's saying at all to my mind.

As for the bit about Djokovic and Federer, in their own countries she's probably right. Name me another Swiss sportsperson who has done anything remotely like Federer has (by the way, I hate sounding like I'm complimenting the odious, vile, cretin of a man) and name me another Serbian who has ever done anything, with all due respect to Serbians.

Basketball and water polo are more popular sports in Serbia than tennis.

To be honest, and I'm never one to hold back with leaping to Andy's defence, I don't really see what Pam Shriver has said that is apparently so awful.

Me either - I don't think she was suggesting we didn't have any other great sports stars from Scotland, more that Andy was best of the bunch. I saw it as a compliment to Andy not a dig at the rest of the country. Maybe I'm just cheerfully naive .

perhaps you should print it out and paste it to the top of your pc/tv (whatever you'll be watching on Caz).like ww I tell myself that it really should be easier now as we don't have that awful question looming: will he finally win a slam? But even though he was won two and I'll be proud of him whatever happens now, of course I'm greedy and I now want more and I don't want anyone saying he has peaked or is on a downward slope, should he not win.

I write for the website and I know plenty of other good writers who do.

That's a good point.

In my experience, BR can be a mixed bag, and that's because it does have so many different writers, many of whom are fans. Some of the stuff on there is excellent, while other stuff looks like it belongs on a personal blog.

I find the best way to view BR is as a collection of blogs, with the inevitable variation in quality and objectivity. Enjoy the good ones, and roll your eyes at the bad ones!

Pam was definitely giving Andy a compliment, and no way intended to suggest Scotland hadn't achieved anything else. It's worth remembering that she said "athlete" not "sports star", which are two very different things. With the best will in the world, you cannot describe racing drivers, darts players or snooker players as athletes. I don't think our golf stars would be offended by the suggestion that Andy is a better athlete than them either.

We've had some great athletics stars, and Chris Hoy has achieved great things, and a whole load of football and rugby stars and more could be described as great athletes too, but from my point of view, Andy is the greater all round actual athlete. That doesn't mean I don't think those other athletes aren't amazing, and there is nothing to suggest Pam thought they were rubbish or inconsequential.

She probably comes from a tennis-centric point of view, so thinks tennis players are amongst the greatest athletes, but at this point in time, the top players are right up there as being the most well rounded professional athletes. It's always one of those on-going debates as to which sports have the greatest athletes, which will never be resolved.

I love Andy's responses to the most obvious of questions too. I love that everyone else is learning to appreciate his sense of humour.

In my sane, rational moments I tell myself that it doesn't matter if Andy doesn't win this year. He's proved himself, goes on proving himself, and he's shot down all the doubters. I tell myself he can't win every slam he plays in too, but as long as he wins his fair share I'll be happy with that.

Then I see the way his challenge this year is being downright dismissed by some (albeit I think not being considered favourite is really good for him) and I fume on Andy's behalf - not that he needs or would want me to! Andy's form is no worse ahead of the USO this year than last. I couldn't care less how well Nadal has played in the build up either to be honest. Slams are different, we all know that. You also can't overlook Andy in the slams over the last year. His consistency has been remarkable. That hasn't happened by accident, and I don't care who has been there, who Andy has played, who he hasn't. In this era there are no pushovers - except maybe Berdych against Djokovic .

In a way I think we're similar to Andy. Whatever anyone says, Andy just isn't the the type to settle. However many slams he wins, I think he will always want more. The drive and ambition won't die. I think we're basically the same. A lot of us have always believed Andy was capable of winning slams, now he's doing just that. It's natural we'll continue to want more for him, whilst that desire is also tempered with the fact that if Andy doesn't do it it's not the end of the world, because he's done it, he's got plenty of time and plenty of chances to come for more. However, these days Andy is definitely a top contender, one of the few with a genuine chance of winning the USO or any other slam, so with that in mind there is plenty to be excited about.

Well said TJ, I agree with all of it. I too am a little apprehensive and want him to win again so much, but I'm trying not to let it overcloud my enjoyment of the tournament itself which means lots of top class tennis to watch. The ultimate win for Andy would be the French Open I suppose, the surface he is least clever on, but then he is improving there. The Aussie Open is one he should accomplish quite quickly I hope. Nowadays Andy will always be in with a chance for winning any tournament he enters and I would love to see him beat Nadal and knock him of his perch again.

Me either - I don't think she was suggesting we didn't have any other great sports stars from Scotland, more that Andy was best of the bunch. I saw it as a compliment to Andy not a dig at the rest of the country. Maybe I'm just cheerfully naive .

I think it's just one of these things that can look different from different viewpoints Westie and I 'could' see it from ABF's point of view, although I doubt she meant it as an insult! Still.....I might not be too happy if I was Sir Chris.......or any of the others......all champions in their own sports!

Yes.....I agree too TJ, but I am hopeful that I won't feel quite as bad if he loses, as the 'fallout' should be less. As far as I'm concerned, Andy has done everything I ever hoped he would, so I'll 'try' to see everything he does from now, as a bonus, so I won't tear anymore hair out, or have to 'up' my blood pressure pills!